One of my favourite films of all time is ‘The 13th Warrior’ by the director responsible for Predator (the good one), Die Hard (the Christmas Movie) and The Hunt for Red October. 13th Warrior was his last movie before he ended up in prison for lying to the FBI. Regardless of that, I have always loved Ahmad ibn Fadlan’s tale of Vikings, monsters and implied magic. And that is why I picked up ‘Eaters of the Dead’.
And I am immensely glad I did.
Eaters of the Dead had a strange genesis – it was written in response to a dare by Michael Crichton. He was challenged to make Beowulf an exciting story. Taking the ibn Fadlan text and Beowulf as inspiration, Crichton synthesised a faux translation text describing the tale of the Arab when he meets Buliwyf and is entangled in a hero’s quest to free the north from an ancient evil.
There are notable differences between Eaters of the Dead and 13th Warrior – in the book, Ibn Fadlan is more witness than participant. The story really isn’t about him but about what he has seen. Of course, with Antonio Banderas as the star of the movie, the spotlight is on his character more – the movie is named for his role in the tale, after all.
13th Warrior will have to appear sometime on this blog, but this review is of Eaters of the Dead in its own right. Put thoughts about vikings barking at the thoroughbred Arabian from your mind. Put thoughts of ‘Give an Arab a sword and he makes a knife’ from your mind too.
This review is just about the book. And boy, what a book it is.
Eaters of the Dead is a novella of around 50,000 – half the size of a normal book. This is not a disadvantage – every word builds upon the last, painting a ‘historical’ view of the world. Sometimes, novels waste a few words here and there, but not Eaters of the Dead – there is no filler here. You find yourself drawn into the journey of Ibn Fadlan as he meets the Turks and then the Norsemen, or else hear how the Arab managed his team as they traversed unknown terrain.
The story is written in the style of a historical translation, replete with footnotes that add to this illusion, or else build upon the world. Parts of it are actually from the Ibn Fadlan manuscript itself – especially the early chapters – and are genuine. It is a testament to Crichton’s skill at writing that one cannot tell when the factual text ends and the fictional text begins (including the author according to the postscript). If reading a non-fiction style text sounds a little dry, the surprise is that the actual story is filled with characterful moments, character arcs, revelations and the like – the same as you’d want in any story.
So, as well as being short and being written in a unique voice, the tale is also well structured. There is a rising tension in the character of Ibn Fadlan as well as in the story he relates that grips a reader and keeps them reading – or at least, that was the case for me. I found it hard to put this book down. I was sad when I finished it. I thought about reading it again – but perhaps I will slide it on my shelf and reread it next year.
Is it a coincidence that Tolkien translated Beowulf and Crichton reinterpreted the legend in turn? I don’t know is there is much else to link these two accounts save for the common source material, but it seems that the legend, that the history and mythology of the vikings seems a rich ore from which to forge fantasy stories from.
In the end, I have to strongly advise people to hunt out a copy of Eaters of the Dead – it is an exceptionally good tale that is fast, fun and exciting. There are no dull parts, no pauses in the action. If I gave ratings, then out of five stars, this would be a seven. Or more. It is significantly different in how the tale ends to the movie to make it worth seeing the movie and reading the book. And enjoying them both.
Have you read Eaters of the Dead? Did you like it? Have you seen 13th Warrior? What did you think of it? Please let me know in the comments and by liking this post.
Imagine Erratically 